http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/10/dual_41_ghz_cores/

That's just fucking insane

@Kllrnohj: TOM'S HARDWARE DOESN'T SUCK!!!

that is sweet, too long of an article for me to read all the way through at the moment

Yeah, for a 260W increase in power consumption, it'd be pushing most power supplies already on comps using this proc probably... Plus the life of it...

Only got up to page 10, but it looks pwnsome

its just an overclock - who cares? I've seen athlon FXs in the upper 4ghz - now THAT was insane. The dual core P4s are so bad, even intel admitted they are crap. Someone there just got lucky with a good chip. Go buy a $130 P4d and you prolly won't get 4.1ghz without substantial extra cooling (eg, water) - not that it matters, though, 4.1ghz isn't that high for a P4 core anyway.

And did you notice a STOCK AMD X2 STILL beat it in many benchmarks? (sometimes by a sizeable margin, too - in the ones it didn't win it was hot on the OC'd P4's heals). So get an X2, and overclock that, and you will destroy a P4d at 4.1ghz - which is why the entire article is worthless

(toms hardware sucks)

I don't care how cheap it is, in my opinion, Intel sucks compared to Amd!

i mean, come on! As stated above, the X2 is better than the p4, AND the fx 60 chip (i think a 200 mega hertz increase in some stat - can't remember (it was the only one that made the x2 4800 worse than the fx 57...) can beat intel's high end chip in most things also (in the CGW tests, the intel hit something like 90+ degrees F* (yep, you need a censored load of cooling to get rid of that heat...)

o.0 - dude, you seriously cannot type, can you? Learn some grammer, punctuation, and spelling, and then try that again.... (oh, and try actually learning and reading about CPU stuff before making another CPU-releated post, as you totally made yourself look like an ignorant n00b in that post)

Intel doesn't suck, its just struggling at the moment. Conroe vs. AM2 will be a great battle, this summer is going to rock....

Oh, and 90F is NOT hot at all, but that isn't what P4s run at anyway. A P4 will usually hit in the 50-60C range on air when overclocked. Most desktop computers (both AMD and Intel) that are running air cooling run around 45-60C (113F to 140F). I'm going to guess that your computer, if it is at all new and decent (<3 years old) is running at around those temps. I know my system is running at about 48C, which isn't bad for an overclocked AXP on air.

Just for reference, the max temp for the CPUs (both Intel and AMD) are in the 80C range (176F) - this is the point the CPU will die, although long before that the CPU will become unstable and crash-happy (and for once it won't be windows fault )

dude, i'm getting an am2. I have to get an X2 4200+ b/c i'm a little broke, but it's still better than anything intel can cook up (Except for maybe conroe - but kentsfield is going to be the big h-bomb for AMD, and they're gonna need something huge to keep themselves ahead in technology.).

@Harq: I believe, AFAIK, that stat is the L2 Cache size. The X2 4200+ is a but less in the clock speed department but it makes it up in being dual-core, and they both have the same HyperTransport bus speed (2000mhz). Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the L2 cache size is different. It is, and the 4800+ has a 2mb cache and the FX-57 has a 1mb. But neither could smoke the FX-60 or FX-62.

He was referring to clockspeed (L2 cache isn't refered to in megaherz ). The X2 4800+ is 200mhz slower than the FX60, which is why the FX60 is faster - both the FX60 and X2 have the same cache size, and basically the new X2 5000+ is the old FX60 minus the unlocked CPU multiplier....

Do you enjoy your ability to flame me?

Kllrnohj loves flaming n00bs and perceived n00bs.

No, I love flaming the ignorant.

Heh, hence my post about n00bs and perceived n00bs. They = ignorant.